Alignment of Research on CREATIVE COGNITION Across Levels

Alignment of Research on CREATIVE COGNITION Across Levels of Complexity and Ecological Validity Steven M. Smith Texas A&M University NSF Workshop on the Science of Discovery and Innovation Washington, D. C. , May 17 -18, 2006

Topics of Today’s Presentation Creativity & The Mind Research in Creative Cognition Current State of Knowledge Next Big Questions to Target

Definition: Creativity Required Characteristics Novelty Practicality Family Resemblance: Shared Characteristics Ambiguity Originality Emergence Meaningfulness Insightfulness Incongruity Divergence Flexibility

Levels of Creativity Can research at these levels be aligned? My research in Creative Cognition

Creative Cognition 1. Cognitive processes and structures underlie creative thinking. 2. Cognition is inherently creative.

Creative Cognition Concepts & Categories Visualization Memory Problem Solving Language Cognitive processes & structures underlie creative thinking. Cognition is inherently creative.

An analogy for research on creativity: Creativity is like memory. Creativity, like memory, can be studied scientifically. The term simple memory includes a variety of cognitive structures and processes. Likewise, the simple term creativity encompasses many different cognitive structures and processes.

There is no unitary "creative process; " the science of creative cognition deals with the complex interacting components of creative thinking, as is done in other areas of cognitive experimental science, such as memory, language, or decision-making.

Personality vs. Process/Mechanism Approach Our approach to research should lead to a better understanding of how to improve or optimize creativity. A personality approach is suited to identifying creative people, or assessing their creative talents. A more useful approach focuses on the processes & mechanisms that lead to creativity. The better we understand these processes & mechanisms, the more we will be able to improve them.

Components of Creative Thinking Combination: Synthesis, Emergence Ideation: Divergent Thinking, Remote Association Imagination: Visualization, Restructuring, Insight Incremental Work: Learning, Memory, Computation Ineffable Processes: Intuition, Incubation Logic: Analogy, Inference, Induction

Example: The Hubble Fix • • James Crocker NASA Engineer Fixation Incubation Insight Conceptual Combination • Analogy • Visualization

Example: The Hubble Fixation Incubation Insight Visualization Analogy + Conceptual Combination

Auguste Kekule James Crocker Benzene Hubble Repair Kary Mullis PCR Experimental Studies of Fixation, Incubation & Insight Henri Pioncare Fuschian Functions Beethoven Canon for piano Archimedes Displacement Principle

Smith’s Research in Creative Cognition Can these levels be aligned? Blocked Memories Fixation in Problem Solving Conformity in Idea Generation Design Fixation Recovered Memories Incubation in Problem Solving Incubation in Design/Invention

Cognitive Blocks R-1 Dominant Response (Blocker) Stimulus R-2 Non-dominant Response (Target)

Implicit Memory Blocks ANALOGY R-1 Dominant Response (Blocker: ANALOGY) A_L__GY R-2 Non-dominant Response (Target: ? ? ? ? )

Implicit Memory Blocking Blocker ANALOGY BRIGADE Fragment A_L__GY B_G_A_E Target ALLERGY BAGGAGE

Implicit Memory Blocking Blocker ANALOGY BRIGADE COTTAGE CHARTER CLUSTER CRUMPET DENSITY FIXTURE HOLSTER TONIGHT TRILOGY VOYAGER Fragment A_L__GY B_G_A_E C_TA__G CHAR_T_ C_U_TR_ CU_P__T D__NITY F_I_URE H_ST_R_ T_NG__T TR_G__Y VO__AGE Target ALLERGY BAGGAGE CATALOG CHARITY COUNTRY CULPRIT DIGNITY FAILURE HISTORY TANGENT TRAGEDY VOLTAGE From Smith & Tindell (1997)

Conclusions Blocks can be caused by implicit memory of inappropriate responses. These implicit memory blocks are involuntary, and cannot be avoided. Smith & Tindell (1997)

Fixation in Problem Solving R-1 Dominant Response (Blocker: Fixated Response) Problem R-2 Non-dominant Response (Target: Correct Solution)

Stimuli from Smith & Blankenship (1991) Remote Associates Test Problems Blockers Solutions SALAD lettuce egg HEAD GOOSE

Stimuli from Smith & Blankenship (1991) Remote Associates Test Problems Blockers Solutions SALAD HEAD GOOSE lettuce egg BED DUSTER WEIGHT room feather APPLE HOUSE FAMILY green tree CAT SLEEP BOARD black walk WATER SKATE CUBE sugar ice ARM COAL STOP rest pit

Findings of Smith & Blankenship Seeing misleading hints and inappropriate answers impeded problem solving. Conclusion Alignment of Memory & Problem Solving: Fixation in creative problem solving, like blocking or interference in memory, can be experimentally induced by the introduction of misleading hints and inappropriate answers. From Smith & Blankenship (1989, 1991)

Idea Generation: Conceptual Extension Imagine another planet similar to Earth… …What sort of life forms evolve there?

Conformity Effects in Creative Idea Generation Smith, Ward & Schumacher (1993)

Conformity Effects in Creative Idea Generation Tasks 1. Create, sketch, and label the parts of new toys that you have never encountered before. 2. Create, sketch, and label the parts of new life forms that might evolve on a planet similar to Earth.

Sample Creatures from Smith et al. (1993)

Creature Ideas: From Smith et al. (1993)

Sample Toys from Smith et al. (1993)

Toy Idea: Fixated Group from Smith et al. (1993)

Toy Idea: Non-Fixated Group from Smith et al. (1993)

Findings Conformity (fixation) effects were experimentally induced by the introduction of examples. Like implicit memory blocking, conformity (fixation) effects increased when blockers (examples) were deliberately remembered, but were not decreased by efforts to avoid examples. Alignment Across Levels: Conformity in creative ideation is similar to blocking in memory & problem solving.

Fixation Effects in Creative Engineering Design Creative Design Tasks 1. Create, sketch, and label the parts of a new measuring cup for blind people. 2. Create, sketch, and label the parts of a new inexpensive spill-proof coffee cup. Do not use drinking straws or mouthpieces.

Measuring Cup for Blind from Jansson & Smith (1991)

Results Seeing the example design greatly increased the number of designs that were: Non-infinitely variable. Lacking an overflow mechanism.

Spill-Proof Cup from Jansson & Smith (1991) Create, sketch, and label the parts of a new inexpensive spill-proof coffee cup. Do not use drinking straws or mouthpieces.

Results Seeing the example design greatly increased the number of designs that: Have a straw or mouthpiece. Leak.

Conclusions Fixation/blocking affects the creative conceptual design process. Even explicitly identified negative features of examples could not be avoided. Evidence of Alignment: Both college students and professional engineers experienced design fixation.

Part 1: Blocking in Memory, Problem Solving & Creative Ideation Part 2: Recovery (Incubation) in Memory, Problem Solving & Creative Ideation.

Resolving Cognitive Blocks -Incubated Reminiscence Effects -Incubation in Resolving TOT states -Incubation in Creative Problem Solving -Incubation in Conceptual Design

Incubation & the Resolution of Tip-Of-the-Tongue (TOT) States Choi & Smith (2005) Incubation Effect

Incubation Effect

Smith & Blankenship (1989) Incubation Effect

Conclusions of Incubation Studies Incubation effects are observed if a break or delay occurs after initial fixation. Forgetting blockers (misleading clues) corresponds with bigger incubation effects.

Conclusions from Creative Cognition Studies Creativity can be studied if it is broken down into components: Processes (e. g. , implicit retrieval) Structures (e. g. , conceptual combination) Phenomena (e. g. , fixation, incubation) Alignment can, and must be examined across levels of complexity and levels of ecological validity.

Research on Discovery & Innovation The current state of knowledge. 1. Personality characteristics of creative people. (a lot!) 2. How individuals (case studies, anecdotes) innovate. (a lot!) 3. Cognitive components of creative thinking. (some) 4. Group dynamics and creative thinking. (some)

Research on Discovery & Innovation The next big questions funding should target. 1. Principles of Creative Discovery & Innovation. 1. Across domains & levels of complexity 2. 2. Mechanisms of Creative Discovery & Innovation. 3. Within domains & levels of complexity 4. 3. Methods of Creative Discovery & Innovation. 5. Within domains 6. Individuals and groups 7. 4. Tools to Augment & Support Creative Discovery & Innovation. 8. Information Technologies

Research on Discovery & Innovation The next big questions funding should target. 1. Principles of Creative Discovery & Innovation. 1. Across domains & levels of complexity 2. Examples 3. Quantity begets quality (Darwinian Approach). 4. Combinations & remote associations yield emergence. 5. Avoid premature conceptualization. 6. Stand on the shoulders of giants. 7. Don’t get stuck in a rut.

Research on Discovery & Innovation The next big questions funding should target. 2. Mechanisms of Creative Discovery & Innovation. Within domains & levels of complexity Examples Diversity of team members (group) Defocused attention (cognitive) Cross activation among brain regions (biological)

Research on Discovery & Innovation The next big questions funding should target. 3. Methods of Creative Discovery & Innovation. Within domains Individuals and groups Examples Brainstorming Morphological synthesis C-Sketch

Research on Discovery & Innovation The next big questions funding should target. 4. Tools to Augment & Support Creative Discovery & Innovation. Information Technologies Examples Electronic brainstorming combin. Formation Idea. Gen

Thank you for coming to my talk!

Our approach to research should lead to a better understanding of how to improve or optimize creativity. Questions and Paradoxes of Creativity Is creativity special or normal? Use vs. Reject Prior Knowledge? Imagination vs. Practicality? Why can you do something creative only when you stop trying? Domain Specific vs. General Principles?